W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-style@w3.org > February 2009

Re: Issue in CSS21 grammar?

From: Yves Lafon <ylafon@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 10:35:21 -0500 (EST)
To: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, fantasai <fantasai.lists@inkedblade.net>, Andrey Mikhalev <amikhal@abisoft.spb.ru>, Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>, www-style@w3.org
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0902261034150.27913@ubzre.j3.bet>
On Thu, 26 Feb 2009, Aryeh Gregor wrote:

> As an author, I have to say I'm particularly confused by CSS's
> inability to handle classes starting with numbers (without escaping).
> As far as I can tell, to match the class "123456", you'd have to write
> ".\31 23456" or ".\00003123456", right?  That seems remarkably
> surprising given that HTML permits classes to begin with numbers, and
> as far as I know always has.  I can imagine it taking me quite a while
> to debug that if I hadn't had this discussion (I didn't know about
> that constraint until I read the test case fantasai posted).
> The change doesn't introduce backward incompatibility with any
> existing valid stylesheets.  To the extent it introduces
> incompatibility with existing *invalid* stylesheets, it might just as
> likely make them work closer to how the author intended instead of the
> opposite.  And it doesn't seem to me like it would be a significant
> hassle for implementers to change, which Anne agrees with.  So I don't
> see why there's any need to preserve browser convergence on this
> detail.

Hum, I fear yet another hackish way to discriminate between browser 
Please, don't change what is already implemented for cosmetic issues.

Baroula que barouleras, au tiéu toujou t'entourneras.

Received on Thursday, 26 February 2009 15:35:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 2 May 2016 14:38:24 UTC